From patchwork Mon Feb 8 15:00:32 2021 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Greg KH X-Patchwork-Id: 379255 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-19.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C791CC433DB for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 15:08:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88A2864EEE for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 15:08:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230314AbhBHPIf (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Feb 2021 10:08:35 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:52048 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232045AbhBHPGD (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Feb 2021 10:06:03 -0500 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27E1764ECF; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 15:04:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1612796677; bh=5e9kraJ2ZdNDjklsmqxipMjT8NbTlYUwbkYHnju2SWs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=uXXS8SRIxS0g8VXXVlSnwpbInB2IsFJt1kYPOBthn08D3E1FZ1IXauHA8NrZgy6SC oipwuYxkDBGagrRFzKXZxWueBorz/xYd63L/PtZs6UxQP/soeKec00Z2tePjss88tW 32M+stdooNzOv3h3BBbiVIiA97aOspMV60cyg79I= From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , juri.lelli@arm.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de, xlpang@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, jdesfossez@efficios.com, dvhart@infradead.org, bristot@redhat.com, Thomas Gleixner , Lee Jones Subject: [PATCH 4.9 06/43] futex: Rework inconsistent rt_mutex/futex_q state Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 16:00:32 +0100 Message-Id: <20210208145806.538562868@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.0 In-Reply-To: <20210208145806.281758651@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20210208145806.281758651@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.66 MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org From: Peter Zijlstra [Upstream commit 73d786bd043ebc855f349c81ea805f6b11cbf2aa ] There is a weird state in the futex_unlock_pi() path when it interleaves with a concurrent futex_lock_pi() at the point where it drops hb->lock. In this case, it can happen that the rt_mutex wait_list and the futex_q disagree on pending waiters, in particular rt_mutex will find no pending waiters where futex_q thinks there are. In this case the rt_mutex unlock code cannot assign an owner. The futex side fixup code has to cleanup the inconsistencies with quite a bunch of interesting corner cases. Simplify all this by changing wake_futex_pi() to return -EAGAIN when this situation occurs. This then gives the futex_lock_pi() code the opportunity to continue and the retried futex_unlock_pi() will now observe a coherent state. The only problem is that this breaks RT timeliness guarantees. That is, consider the following scenario: T1 and T2 are both pinned to CPU0. prio(T2) > prio(T1) CPU0 T1 lock_pi() queue_me() <- Waiter is visible preemption T2 unlock_pi() loops with -EAGAIN forever Which is undesirable for PI primitives. Future patches will rectify this. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: juri.lelli@arm.com Cc: bigeasy@linutronix.de Cc: xlpang@redhat.com Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com Cc: jdesfossez@efficios.com Cc: dvhart@infradead.org Cc: bristot@redhat.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170322104151.850383690@infradead.org Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [Lee: Back-ported to solve a dependency] Signed-off-by: Lee Jones Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- kernel/futex.c | 50 ++++++++++++++------------------------------------ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) --- a/kernel/futex.c +++ b/kernel/futex.c @@ -1394,12 +1394,19 @@ static int wake_futex_pi(u32 __user *uad new_owner = rt_mutex_next_owner(&pi_state->pi_mutex); /* - * It is possible that the next waiter (the one that brought - * this owner to the kernel) timed out and is no longer - * waiting on the lock. + * When we interleave with futex_lock_pi() where it does + * rt_mutex_timed_futex_lock(), we might observe @this futex_q waiter, + * but the rt_mutex's wait_list can be empty (either still, or again, + * depending on which side we land). + * + * When this happens, give up our locks and try again, giving the + * futex_lock_pi() instance time to complete, either by waiting on the + * rtmutex or removing itself from the futex queue. */ - if (!new_owner) - new_owner = this->task; + if (!new_owner) { + raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock); + return -EAGAIN; + } /* * We pass it to the next owner. The WAITERS bit is always @@ -2372,7 +2379,6 @@ static long futex_wait_restart(struct re */ static int fixup_owner(u32 __user *uaddr, struct futex_q *q, int locked) { - struct task_struct *owner; int ret = 0; if (locked) { @@ -2386,43 +2392,15 @@ static int fixup_owner(u32 __user *uaddr } /* - * Catch the rare case, where the lock was released when we were on the - * way back before we locked the hash bucket. - */ - if (q->pi_state->owner == current) { - /* - * Try to get the rt_mutex now. This might fail as some other - * task acquired the rt_mutex after we removed ourself from the - * rt_mutex waiters list. - */ - if (rt_mutex_futex_trylock(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex)) { - locked = 1; - goto out; - } - - /* - * pi_state is incorrect, some other task did a lock steal and - * we returned due to timeout or signal without taking the - * rt_mutex. Too late. - */ - raw_spin_lock_irq(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock); - owner = rt_mutex_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex); - if (!owner) - owner = rt_mutex_next_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex); - raw_spin_unlock_irq(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock); - ret = fixup_pi_state_owner(uaddr, q, owner); - goto out; - } - - /* * Paranoia check. If we did not take the lock, then we should not be * the owner of the rt_mutex. */ - if (rt_mutex_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex) == current) + if (rt_mutex_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex) == current) { printk(KERN_ERR "fixup_owner: ret = %d pi-mutex: %p " "pi-state %p\n", ret, q->pi_state->pi_mutex.owner, q->pi_state->owner); + } out: return ret ? ret : locked;